HOME DEPARTMENT

Royal Household (Security)

David Blunkett: I am today publishing the Security Commission's report on the implications for security of the activities of the Daily Mirror reporter, Ryan Parry, at Buckingham Palace. I assured the House on 19 November 2003, Official Report, column 775, that I expected the review to cover all aspects of the process of checking those who form part of the royal household. I also said that one of the strengths of our democracy is that such breaches are open to scrutiny, that we can learn quickly from them, and that nothing is swept under the carpet.
	I therefore welcome the Security Commission's report on this incident and applaud the thoroughness with which it has approached its task.
	The recommendations are clear and pragmatic and include the creation of a post of Director of Security for the royal households, the development of a wide range of checks that can be carried out on employees of the royal households and the creation of an annual plan to be agreed and implemented by the households, together with the police and the Home Office.
	I am happy to note the progress that has already been made in the intervening period to improve security within the royal households and I look forward to the implementation of the report's recommendations. The appointment this week by Buckingham Palace of a director of security is particularly welcome, as this new post will oversee the security vetting process across the royal households reporting to the Queen's Private Secretary.
	It is clearly welcome to note the Commission's finding that the existing framework for dealing with the security of the royal family is considered sound and provides an appropriate strategic structure for the oversight of security vetting and related work. Responsibility for delivery will accordingly continue to be shared: policy and funding responsibility to rest with the Home Secretary; operational responsibility to lie with the police; and the royal households having overall responsibility for personnel security and for procedures within royal residences. The Commission recommended a tightening of the arrangements for day to day delivery of these procedures within the royal household through the creation of the director of security post, a new annual security plan and a regular process of review. Overall responsibility, as the House would expect, will continue to rest with me as Home Secretary with the constituent parts of the system being responsible for delivery in their areas.
	The Commission also met the authorities of the Palace of Westminster, in order to discover whether similar issues might arise in relation to Parliament. On reflection, the Commission felt that the differences require a separate review, but none the less made a number of suggestions. The report will therefore be copied to those undertaking the existing security view of the Palace of Westminster announced by the Leader of the House of Commons last month. None the less, the Commission endorsed recent changes to security at the Palace of Westminster, including the decision of the House of Commons Commission to construct a security screen around the public gallery on the recommendation of the Director General of the Security Service.

ENVIRONMENT FOOD AND RURAL AFFAIRS

Waste Management

Elliot Morley: I am pleased to announce today the publication of the "Review of Environmental and Health Effects of Waste Management: Municipal Solid Waste and Similar Wastes."
	The Prime Minister's Strategy Unit, in its report "Waste not, Want not" recommended that an independent body should bring together the literature and evidence on the relative health and environmental effects of all the different waste management options, relative both to each other and to other activities affecting health and the environment. Defra commissioned this report in response to that recommendation.
	The review was commissioned in early 2003, and has been carried out by a team led by Enviros, environmental consultants, and Roy Harrison, Professor of Environmental Health at the Institute of Public and Environmental Health, University of Birmingham. The team should be congratulated on bringing together and considering a wide range of evidence, both from the UK and abroad.
	The report examines the waste management options for treating municipal solid and similar waste. It focuses on the principal types of facilities that are currently used for dealing with such waste in the UK and in Europe and on what the currently available scientific evidence can tell us about their environmental and health effects.
	It is very comprehensive, bringing together, for the first time, a wealth of evidence from existing studies of the health and environmental impacts of waste management. It provides a convenient and authoritative compendium of current knowledge in this area.
	The report has been peer reviewed by the Royal Society and Professor Howard Dalton, Defra's chief scientific advisor, has provided me with advice on the scientific analyses.
	The report's authors conclude that, on the evidence from studies so far, present day municipal waste management has at most a minor effect on human health and the environment. For example:
	dealing with municipal solid waste by incineration accounts for less than 1 per cent. of UK emissions of dioxins, while domestic sources such as cooking and burning coal for heating account for 18 per cent. of emissions;
	less than 1 per cent. of UK emissions of oxides of nitrogen, which reduce air quality, come from municipal solid waste management, while 42 per cent. come from road traffic.
	The report rightly recognises that there is more that we can and should still learn and we will be addressing the need and priorities for further research through our waste research strategy this summer. The search for knowledge is never complete, and this report usefully identifies areas of research that we will be taking forward as part of our continual efforts to refine the evidence base for policy making.
	We must manage the growing amount of waste we produce. We will do this by basing our policies on the best available scientific evidence and on an assessment of the comparative risks. We will continue to develop our scientific knowledge to support our policies. This report is a helpful contribution to that process.

Emissions Trading Scheme

Margaret Beckett: The Secretary of State for Trade and Industry and I are today publishing the UK national allocation plan for the EU emissions trading scheme. Copies of the plan will be available in the Libraries of the House from 11 am today.
	The EU emissions trading scheme is the most significant measure in the EU climate change programme, and begins on 1 January 2005. The objective of the scheme is to reduce, in the most cost effective way, EU emissions of CO 2 that contribute to the problems associated with global warming and to encourage investments by business to help EU member states and accession countries achieve the reductions necessary for meeting their Kyoto targets for 2008–12.
	The plan was submitted to the European Commission on 30 April to meet a commitment given by Ministers at the end of March. It is being published today as part of a package including a consultation document that explains decisions taken following earlier consultation on a draft of the plan and further issues on which comments are being sought.
	The overall number of allowances to be allocated in the first phase of the scheme is consistent with an initial reduction in UK carbon dioxide emissions of 15.2 per cent. on 1990 levels by 2010. The Government are firmly committed to its national goal of moving towards a 20 per cent. reduction in emissions of carbon dioxide by 2010. The overall level of allowances to be allocated in the UK in phase 2 of the scheme (which runs from 2008–12) will be consistent with the trading sector's contribution to achieving the 20 per cent. goal.
	I have emphasised to the European Commission the UK's commitment to the scheme and the importance that the UK attaches to the Commission's scrutiny of all national allocation plans to ensure that they deliver on the EU's Kyoto goals—not least because widely varying and inconsistent approaches could be said to have competitive implications. Given the approach that the UK has taken in its plan, it is politically important that the Commission plays this role effectively.

NORTHERN IRELAND

Political Parties, Elections and Referendums Act

John Spellar: Last year the Government announced a review of the Political Parties, Elections and Referendums Act 2000 (Disapplication of Part IV for Northern Ireland Parties, etc) Order 2001.
	The Order, made under section 70 of the Act, exempts the Northern Ireland political parties from the requirement to comply with Part IV of the Act for four years. Part IV regulates donations to parties so that foreign and anonymous donations are prohibited.
	After consulting the Northern Ireland political parties, political parties in Ireland, the Northern Ireland Affairs Committee and the Electoral Commission, and taking into consideration the changed political landscape since the Order was first made, the Government are now minded to let the current Order expire in February 2005.
	The Government recognise that the current funding arrangements lack transparency and that they are open to abuse. Moreover, the current regime creates clear differences between political parties in Northern Ireland, on the one hand, and those in the rest of the United Kingdom and in Ireland in terms of their access to funds.
	However, the Government are fully aware of the special circumstances that exist in Northern Ireland both as regards the continuing fear of intimidation of donors and Ireland's special role in Northern Ireland's political life, as set out in the Belfast agreement. Any new arrangements, therefore, will have to take these important issues into account.
	Equally, however, there is a reasonable demand in many quarters for greater transparency and accountability. The Government are, therefore, inviting views on what new arrangements might be made within those objectives, and will aim to announce its decisions by the end of the year. Parties or individuals willing to comment should, therefore, do so by 30 June 2004.
	I will, of course, report back to the House in due course.

CULTURE MEDIA AND SPORT

Lottery Young People's Fund

Estelle Morris: I am pleased to inform the House that on 5 May I formally issued the New Opportunities Fund (NOF) with policy directions in connection with the new lottery young people's fund. We announced our intention to establish such a fund, initially funded with £200 million from NOF's balances, in the national lottery funding decision document published last July. It was specified as a new NOF initiative in the New Opportunities Fund (Specification of Initiative) Order 2004, which came into force on 23 January 2004, following a resolution of each House of Parliament.
	The policy directions I have issued to NOF will allow it to take forward development of the fund, within a framework that supports key priorities for the Government and the devolved administrations. The focus of the young people's fund will be on projects promoting youth inclusion, specifically by providing facilities and activities, both after school and in holiday periods. In England, the development of the fund will be closely aligned with the aims and principles of the Green Paper "Every Child Matters", published last September.
	The fund will address the particular problems faced by young people at risk of social exclusion and provide a welcome new focus for lottery funding for this age group. Plans for the fund will be developed in consultation with representative groups of young people. Young people will also be involved in the design and development of project proposals, decisions on which projects are supported, and the implementation, management and evaluation of projects.
	I have placed a copy of the policy directions in the Libraries of both Houses.

DEFENCE

Queen Victoria School

Ivor Caplin: The Chief Executive of the Queen Victoria School has been set the following key targets for 2004–05:
	Pupil Population
	To maintain the staying on rate at school for S4 to S5 at a minimum of 6 per cent. above the Scottish National average for the current year.*
	Educational
	To maintain a percentage of pupils of the S4 roll gaining 5 + awards at level 5 or better (post-appeal) by the end of S4, at 5 per cent. above the Scottish National average.*
	To maintain a percentage of the S4 roll gaining 3+ awards at Level 6 or better (post-appeal) by the end of S5, at 4 per cent. above the Scottish National average.*
	Financial
	To achieve a pupil per capita cost of not more than £15,750 by 31 March 2005. The 2003–04 target was £15,250.
	To generate gross income to the School of at least £330,000 by 31 March 2005. The 2003–04 target was £300,000.
	*All Queen Victoria school statistics to be based on the school's results over the last three years, compared with the Scottish National average for the current year, those statistics being as published in the Scottish Executive Statistical Bulletin. All educational key targets for 2003–04 are shown pre-appeal and will be updated with post-appeal figures when the latter are published by the Scottish Executive. However, the reported performances of all educational key targets for 2003–04 are shown post-appeal.

Analytical Services Agency

Adam Ingram: Key targets have been set for the Chief Executive of the Defence Analytical Services Agency (DASA) for financial year 2004–05, and are as follows:
	Delivering Services to Meet Customer Needs 
	To meet at least 95 per cent. of the timeliness and quality targets in the 36 Service Level Agreements with customers for on-going work, and Project Agreements for surveys, modelling and other one-off projects.
	To publish the five key defence National Statistics on time, with no major errors and with no breaches of the pre-release access arrangements, and to meet 95 per cent. of the timeliness and quality targets for other defence National Statistics publications.
	To have at least 90 per cent. of customers saying, in the annual Customer Satisfaction Survey, that they are satisfied with the overall service they receive from DASA.
	Investing in Quality
	To conduct a National Statistics quality review of DASA's service pensioners statistics, and recommend improvements in their quality and scope.
	To implement 75 per cent. of the 2004–05 targets in the implementation plan for the defence finance and economic statistics National Statistics quality review conducted in 2002–03.
	Developing People
	To have at least 85 per cent. of staff saying, in the annual Staff Opinion Survey, that they are satisfied with working in DASA.
	Efficiency
	To make sufficient efficiency gains to provide the necessary resources for (a) Key Target 5 to be addressed, (b) a scoping study to be conducted into DASA's taking on responsibility for the collection and presentation of deployment statistics, and (c) an expanded investment appraisal advice service established.

Anti-Structures Munition (ASM)

Adam Ingram: The Ministry of Defence has selected two systems offered by Dynamit Nobel and Saab Bofors Dynamics to proceed into a competitive assessment phase for the anti-structures munition programme. This follows a successful and comprehensive evaluation as part of the concept phase. The cost of the assessment phase is likely to be approximately £7 million.
	The ASM programme is intended to produce a man portable, shoulder launched, precision weapon for use against fixed structures and other emplacements at a range of around 200m, utilising enhanced blast warhead technology. A decision on whether to commit to demonstration and manufacture of the system will occur at Main Gate.
	The strategic defence review new chapter placed increased emphasis on the need for precision in the face of force and ASM has the potential to provide the armed forces with a significant advancement in capability in this area, particularly for expeditionary operations in urban and mountainous terrain. It is designed to minimise casualties and will be fully in accordance with our obligations under international humanitarian law.

Defence, Transport and Movement Agency (DTMA)

Adam Ingram: Key targets have been set for the Chief Executive of DTMA for Financial Year 2004–05. The targets are as follows:
	Key Target 1
	To achieve at least a "SATISFACTORY" rating in the provision of planning and delivery of transport and movements support to emerging operations, an increase in the tempo of existing operations or other requirements.
	Key Target 2
	To achieve at least a "SATISFACTORY" rating in the planning and delivery of transport and movements support to enduring operations.
	Key Target 3
	To provide Roll-on Roll-off (Ro-Ro) vessel capability at the Readiness States required.
	Key Target 4
	To meet customers' requirements as negotiated and agreed in Customer Supplier Agreements (CSAs) to deliver:
	  97 per cent. or more of Agency transactions and services, however provided, to be within agreed Time, Quantity, Quality and Cost (TQQC) criteria.
	  At least 92 per cent. of transactions against each service to be within agreed TQQC criteria.
	Key Target 5
	To reduce the average unit cost of output by 2 per cent. in real terms.

FOREIGN AND COMMONWEALTH AFFAIRS

Armenia and Azerbaijan

Bill Rammell: Her Majesty's Government remain committed to the OSCE arms embargo against both Azerbaijan and Armenia, which we interpret as covering all goods and technology controlled under entries in Part III of Schedule 1 to the Export of Goods (Control) Order 1994 commonly known as the military list).
	In April 2004, the Government approved an export licence application for de-mining equipment for the HALO Trust for de-mining operations in Armenia and Azerbaijan.
	The decision was made in accordance with our practice occasionally to make an exemption to our interpretation of the embargo by approving exports of non-lethal military goods to humanitarian, media or peacekeeping organisations where it is clear that the embargo was not intended to prevent those exports and there is a strong humanitarian case for them.

INTERNATIONAL DEVELOPMENT

Jamaica

Hilary Benn: Debt repayments totalling £9.45 million owed by the Government of Jamaica on past loans from the UK have been cancelled by the Department for International Development (DFID). This sum comprises the following:
	Relief under the Commonwealth Debt Initiative (CDI) for all repayments due in 2004–05, £3.53 million;
	Relief of loan repayments due to the Commonwealth Development Corporation (CDC) in 2004–05, £2.91 million;
	Reimbursement of loan repayments made to the CDC during 2003–04, £3.01 million.
	Part of the debt held by the Commonwealth Development Corporation was transferred to DFID in 1999, when the CDC was transformed into a public limited company. This debt is now managed within the CDI process.
	The Commonwealth Debt Initiative, launched in October 1997 by my right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer, aims to provide additional relief in respect of Government to Government loans to low and middle-income countries in the Commonwealth that are committed to achieving the millennium development goals, promote transparent and accountable Government, and pursue economic policies that encourage sustainable development.
	Approval of debt relief for Jamaica follows a detailed assessment by the Governments of Jamaica and the UK against these criteria. The assessment considered the effects of Jamaica's high level of debt and its impact on pro-poor expenditure, and the high levels of crime and violence. It also considered the steps taken by the Government of Jamaica to modernise the public sector, which is central to economic recovery and growth; to develop a comprehensive strategy to reduce crime and violence and promote security; and to develop a medium term socio-economic policy framework, which will provide a coherent framework for policy decisions which promote growth, security and the reduction of poverty.

CONSTITUTIONAL AFFAIRS

Government Inquiries

Christopher Leslie: My noble Friend the Secretary of State for Constitutional Affairs and Lord Chancellor has today, with the agreement of the Public Administration Select Committee, published a consultation paper which sets out the Government's response to the "Issues and Questions" paper published by the Public Administration Select Committee on 24 February 2004 as part of its inquiry into "Government by Inquiry".
	The consultation period will run until 29 July 2004.
	The Government believe that there is a strong case for considering what steps could be taken to improve the arrangements for inquiries called by Ministers to ensure that the benefits of their recommendations can be obtained more quickly, and economically. On 25 May, my noble Friend the Secretary of State for Constitutional Affairs and Lord Chancellor will give oral evidence to the Committee. As well as consideration by the Committee, the Government feel that matters discussed in the memorandum merit wider comment.
	I have placed copies of the consultation paper in the Libraries of both Houses and it has been published on the Department for Constitutional Affairs website at: www.dca.gsi.gov.uk/consult/confr.htm

Hutton Inquiry

David Lammy: My noble Friend Lord Filkin has today made a statement concerning the cost of the Hutton inquiry.
	The estimated cost to the Government is £2.54 million, of which £1.68 million was incurred by the inquiry itself.

TREASURY

International Monetary Fund/World Bank

Gordon Brown: I travelled to Washington last week for the spring meetings of the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and the World Bank, and for a meeting of G7 Finance Ministers and Central Bank Governors. I chaired a meeting of the International Monetary and Financial Committee (IMFC), the main policy-making committee of the Board of Governors representing the 183 members of the IMF. I then attended the Development Committee of the IMF and the World Bank in his role as Chairman of the IMFC.
	In addition, I addressed a G7 dinner with Middle East and North African Finance Ministers; attended a G7 outreach meeting on combating the financing of terrorism; and attended a conference on the private sector in developing countries with representatives from the private sector.
	I also had bilateral discussions with Jim Wolfensohn (President of the World Bank), Anne Krueger (Acting Managing Director of the IMF), US Treasury Secretary John Snow, Nicholas Sarkozy (Finance Minister, France), Ali Babacan (Minister of State, Republic of Turkey), Ralph Goodale (Finance Minister, Canada), Hilde Johnson (Minister of Development, Norway), Rodrigo Rato (candidate for the post of Managing Director of the IMF) and attended a meeting of African Finance Ministers.

DEPUTY PRIME MINISTER

Overcrowded Housing

Keith Hill: I am publishing today a review by De Montfort University of the evidence and literature relating to the impact of overcrowded housing on health and education. Copies of the report will be made available in the Libraries of both Houses and on the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister's website www.odpm.gov.uk and will also be available from the ODPM Publication Sales Centre.
	I am also making available two in-house statistical papers describing overcrowding at national and regional level and at sub-regional level. These papers bring together the available data from household surveys: "The Office of the Deputy Prime Minister's Survey of English Housing", "The Office of the Deputy Prime Minister's Housing Condition Survey" and "The Department for Work and Pensions Family Resources Survey". Copies of these papers will also be placed in the Libraries of both Houses and on the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister's website.

SOLICITOR-GENERAL

Infant Death Convictions

Harriet Harman: My noble Friend the Attorney-General has made the following ministerial statement:
	"My statements of 19 January and 5 February gave details of a review process established following the judgment of the Court of Appeal in the case of Angela Cannings. I wish to inform the House of progress.
	The review process is now well advanced. A thorough search to identify all potentially relevant cases has been undertaken, and the process has been extended to include cases involving carers. These measures have resulted in an increase in the total number of cases subject to review from 258 to 298.
	To ensure thorough and independent scrutiny of all cases, a three-stage review process has been established. Every case file is subject to a preliminary review by a Crown Prosecution Service area to ascertain its key characteristics. Cases are then passed to a central review team comprising prosecutors who are highly experienced in complex criminal casework. A smaller number of cases are then referred to an interdepartmental group, for a final decision on whether the legal representatives of the convicted persons should be notified that there may be features in a case that warrant further consideration by the Court of Appeal or the Criminal Cases Review Commission. The interdepartmental group works under my direction, and includes representatives from the police, Crown Prosecution Service and Criminal Cases Review Commission.
	Reviews have been completed in 97 cases. In 38 of these the person convicted is still serving a custodial sentence.
	A significant further number of cases are at an advanced stage of review.
	Letters have been sent to the legal representatives of five convicted persons, notifying them that it may be appropriate for the safety of their clients' convictions to be considered further by the Court of Appeal or, if appropriate, the Criminal Cases Review Commission. Two of those convicted are sentenced to life imprisonment and remain in custody. Two have already unsuccessfully sought to appeal their convictions.
	I have made the Court of Appeal aware of the action I am taking and have liaised closely with the Chairman of the Criminal Cases Review Commission to ensure that any cases referred to these bodies will be treated expeditiously. My office stands ready to refer appropriate case files to the CCRC.
	The fact that a case has been referred to legal representatives of the convicted person does not amount to a positive determination that their conviction is unsafe. Should any appeals result from this review, it will be for the Crown Prosecution Service to independently decide whether to contest the appeal.
	Sixteen live cases were identified by the CPS as potentially affected by the Cannings judgment. Fifteen have been reviewed. Two cases have been discontinued: a Hampshire case discontinued before trial and a Coventry case discontinued before retrial.
	It would not be appropriate to place in the public domain the names of defendants or convicted persons in these cases. This will be a decision for them, following advice from their legal representatives.
	CPS Areas, the central review team and the interdepartmental group continue to accord this work the highest priority. I am determined that the review should be completed as soon as possible, to bring to an end this period of uncertainty for all those involved. I shall keep the House informed of further progress".